OPS/DCB(L) 2xPCN's PAPLOC Now claimform - Machine said Not In Use - Llangrannog (Beach) car park, West Wales

[ghedgehog]

Whilst on holiday, I parked my car twice in what looked like a public car park in a remote village in West Wales. I went to buy a ticket, but the ticket machine said Not in Use. There was an alternative means of payment offered by internet, but the internet connection in that part of the country is so weak, I gave up after 3 attempts.

 

I was probably a little naïve, but I never imagined they would slap a charge on me, given that paying to park there was nigh on impossible, but sure enough, a week or so later the letters arrived, and that's exactly what they did.

 

My appeal has been rejected, so I'm now debating whether to pay up (twice) or to go to POPLA and possibly end up having to pay more.

 

I didn't think at the time to photograph the Not In Use machine, so I have no real evidence to support my appeal. The only thing I could offer is entries on my credit card statement where I've paid for parking at other locations in Wales in the same week.

 

Any advice gratefully received

 

[FTMDave]

I imagine they want 2 x £100 from you.  That won't increase if you go to POPLA.  The problem is that the fleecers will insist the machine was working and POPLA will believe them (POPLA have got worse & worse in accepting appeals). 

 

A photo of the knackered machine would have been a very good idea.

 

In your appeal did you out yourself as the driver?

 

Please fill this in

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by FTMDave
Typo

[ghedgehog]

In reply to FTMDave, thank you for your comments.

 

OPS actually want 2x£60, but it goes up to £100 if I appeal to POPLA and lose. Yes, "wise after the event" and all that. If I had realised this was going to happen, I wouldn't even have parked there, never mind photographing the ticket machine.

 

And yes, I did admit to being the driver. Seeing as they have my car on CCTV, they will also have me on CCTV too. But it's interesting what you say about POPLA's record on accepting appeals.

[FTMDave]

It's a crying shame you didn't take the photo, but hey, you're a honest person thinking you were dealing with an honest company - but as we deal with these companies every day we realise that 99.9999% of them are utter thieves.

 

At least use this as a learning curve, in future always be suspicious of PPCs, never appeal and certainly never admit to being the driver.

 

Go for POPLA if you want, but don't expect much luck.  Years back the site used to recommend appealing to POPLA but then new people were put in to run it and I think its remit was changed - anyway the result was not good.

 

This is a long, long, long shot, but surely if you fell foul of their games then others will too.  Do a web search for the car park, there may be a photo on other forums, or on the site of the local rag, etc.

 

In fact you haven't told us the name of the car park.  Please do so as there might have been other cases on this site too.

 

 

[dx100uk]

No they have not used cctv..

 

its an anpr system that records reg no.s

 

can you please fill our question aire out please

and scan up everything in/out to date to one mass pdf?

 

[ghedgehog]

It was in Llangrannog car park, and yes I'm certainly not the only one to be add as this article reveals

 

‘Ridiculous’ car park fines ‘killing village’

WWW.CAMBRIAN-NEWS.CO.UK

---

More people have come forward to express anger over fines issued at a car park in Llangrannog including a woman who was just passing through the...

So dx100, they have sent me pictures of my car entering and leaving the car park. Are you saying that ANPR works just by snapping cars as they go in and out, and they are unlikely to have rolling CCTV footage?

[FTMDave]

Well done on all the digging you've done.  You now have evidence that the machine is broken, and constantly.  I see there is a FB page, and a lawyer involved, all of whom you could contact for further proof.

 

So it's up to you.  You can pay the fleecers 2 x £60 that you don't owe, and the matter ends there.

 

Or you can stick two fingers up to them, refuse to pay, prepare for a long fight, and use the time to build up a case against them.

 

We would prefer you did the latter, and would help the best we can. 

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, ghedgehog said:

Are you saying that ANPR works just by snapping cars as they go in and out, and they are unlikely to have rolling CCTV footage?

 

no-one can use any 'footage' from whatever system to ID a driver...end off.

[dx100uk]

please complete this (just put both on one of the ANPR reply section.)

 

Have you received a Parking Ticket? - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

[ghedgehog]

1 Date of the infringement

03/05/2021
 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]

12/05/2021
 

[scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide]

sorry don't have time to do this at present

 

3 Date received

13/05/2021
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]

Yes
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

Yes
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal]

Yes
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up

Yes - unsuccessful
 

7 Who is the parking company?

One Parking Solution

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Llangrannog (Beach) car park, West Wales
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

POPLA

 

So Dave, are you saying that now there is a photo on a news website showing the ticket machine Not in Use, I have a realistic chance of appealing the "fine"? What you said before about POPLA suggests that might not be enough for them. Are you anticipating having to go to court and fight it out there?

[dx100uk]

someone should be telling that local newspaper they are not fines.

 

but your assumptions are correct.

 

await and see if they use some fake, paperwork only solicitors letterheads in the same printer, after sending sending lots of scary letters in various school crayon colours from fake DCA's, that are not bailiffs, entitled letter of claim.

 

 

[FTMDave]

The article you found, with its picture of the machine not in use (which I missed, well spotted you!) plus the fact you paid everywhere else in Wales, all back up what you stated right from the beginning - you always pay in P&D car parks, but they made it impossible to pay.  Indeed this evidence suggests the company deliberately leave the machine knackered so they can issue their invoices.

 

So yes, use that evidence in a POPLA appeal if you want - but don't expect much joy.

 

Personally I would just ignore POPLA and refuse to pay.  The article you found has links to similar articles.  I read the lot last night, as well as the comments sections (which I indeed added to).  There are the names of several motorists who it should be easy to contact through social media, a solicitor, a FB page, a sort of residents association IIRC and the journalists, who are likely to sympathetic, all publish their e-mail address. 

 

I'd contact the lot.  I'd ask the motorists if they'd be willing to send an e-mail with their name mentioning their experience with the machine which you want to use if necessary in court - some will wet themselves, but presumably some will help.  I'd ask the FB page/solicitor/residents if they have evidence that could help you, especially photos of the broken machine and names of motorists willing to back up your story.  I should think the journalists would stick you on the front page if you wanted! 

 

Read some OPS threads here so you can see what will happen if you don't pay.

 

Anyway, the PPCs generally destroy half the Amazon by sending letters which are meant to be threatening, then get third parties to write further letters pretending the amount has increased to £160/£170 to try to frighten you (no basis in law for this increase BTW, it's just bluff).

 

They then might give up, or they might send you a Letter Before Claim which you reply to ridiculing their case and telling them you have a mound of photographic and written evidence that their machine is always broken, ready to put before a judge.

 

At this point they may crawl back under their stone, or they could issue a court claim, which you would defend.

 

They then might discontinue, or they might chance court, where you would take them on.  In my time on this site, when cases have actually got to court, motorists have won about nine and a half times out of ten.  You can see this in our "PPC Successes" thread at the top of the page. 

[ghedgehog]

Thanks Dave, for your detailed reply.

 

My original enquiry was whether it's worth appealing to POPLA, and you've convinced me that it's not, so I appreciate that advice.

 

If I'm honest, I doubt if I've got the stomach for a longer legal battle, in spite of the success rate you quoted. There would certainly be a lot of work involved, as you say yourself, and I'm acutely aware that some of the motorists featured in the news articles about this car park have had a much better case than I do. OPS would simply argue that if I couldn't meet the conditions on their clearly displayed sign, I shouldn't have parked there. Ticket machine may have been broken, and there may have been no internet signal, but it's private land.

 

95% success rate is really good, but what happened to the other 5%? I really don't want a CCJ, and I did have a case in the small claims court many years ago, and still remember how stressful that was.

 

[dx100uk]

23 minutes ago, ghedgehog said:

but it's private land

good put you in the driving seat...

 

even if you did 'lose' in court...payment within 28days would mean the CCJ would never show.

 

stop worrying...stand your ground be strong and read the threads here

 

the more you read the stronger we become.

 

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

Well, it's up to you, if you pay the fleecers £120 that you don't owe you'll get rid of them.

 

The alternative is to put a lot of work in, albeit spread out over many months, and leave them with a bloody nose.

 

What they are doing is simple thieving, deliberately leaving the machine not in use so they issue their charges.

 

As dx says, there is zero chance of you getting a CCJ, CCJs are only issued to people who lose in court and then defy the court and still refuse to pay.

 

I can go into more detail if you want, but the reason the PPCs usually lose in court is because they invariably send along a solicitor who practises near the motorist's court, who doesn't have a clue about the case.  Then the poor solicitor is dealt a rubbish hand by the PPC.  For example, if your case ever got to court I bet OPS wouldn't mention anything about their knackered machine.  Start introducing evidence that the machine is rubbish, and the solicitor wouldn't know how to react.

 

As for the 5% of cases that go wrong, well we call it the "judge lottery".  Being a judge is just like any other job, there are judges who are professional and open-minded, and there are some who are lazy and biased.  Now & again the latter pop up. 

[ghedgehog]

Thank you both for your detailed replies. Yes, I agree, what OPS are doing is tantamount to theft, but in my case, I fear it's legalised theft. I can't find that many other OPS cases in this forum, but of those that I did find, including those mentioned in the news articles paid online, all had actually paid for their parking ticket, but were "fined" in spite of that. They clearly have a much better case than I do.

 

My one and only previous experience in the small claims court has taught me that it's not about what is fair and reasonable, all the judge cares about is the law, and what's in the contract.

On 11/06/2021 at 16:02, dx100uk said:

good put you in the driving seat...

Dx, I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment above, and I still fear that I am (regrettably) legally in the wrong.

 

Dave, you admit that I would have to put in a lot of time fighting this case, and I'm thinking that really, life is too short, and that time is worth more to me than the £120. Nonetheless, I would contest it on principle, if I thought I had a realistic chance of winning.

 

I take your point about not getting a CCJ if you pay the "fine", but the stakes are escalating, surely. If I lose, I will have to pay the court costs as well as the £200 fine, won't I?

[dx100uk]

stop thinking and using the word fine and you might understand how things work better 

 

[FTMDave]

I disagree that the motorists interviewed in the local paper had a better case than you.  OPS made it impossible to pay, and can be shown to have allowed this at best negligent situation to go on for months.

 

You've asked straight questions, which is fair enough.  If OPS did sue you, it would be for 2 x £100 PCN + 2 x £60 invented Unicorn Food Tax + £50 legal costs (remember these are capped at small claims) + £50 court fee costs + some interest = around £420.  There are three possible outcomes to a court case

   - you win and owe £0.00

   - you lose, the judge doesn't allow the Unicorn Food tax, you owe £300.00

   - you lose, the judge is lazy and allows the Unicorn Food Tax, you owe £420.00.

 

Yes, fighting would take some work, however over many months, namely

   - build up some evidence against them as in post 14

   - read other OPS threads here so you get the right idea

   - reply to a Letter Before Claim if it comes, we have loads of examples of snotty letters on the forum

   - defend the claim should it be issued, we have a standard generic defence

   - if the case proceeds, prepare a Witness Statement.  This has to be done seriously & properly.  However, again, there are examples compiled by other motorists here which you could use as a basis.

 

This is all worst case scenario of course, if they knew you'd be big trouble in court they might well give up before a court claim.

[ghedgehog]

I love the Unicorn Food Tax

 

One more question (I can't guarantee it will be the last) - if OPS does take me to court, I presume I will have to attend in person? Is that likely to be in Worthing? I dare say hearings are taking place online at the moment, but who knows how long that will last?

 

Also, you mention other OPS threads. I've found a couple, but they do seem very different from my case, and are quite hard to follow as well. Is there one similar to my case, where they've been unable to buy a ticket but have no evidence of their own to back that up?

[dx100uk]

It would always be at your local court and still most are by video

 

but you are not even at the paploc stage yet....and quite poss never will be

 

 

[FTMDave]

Keep the questions coming, that's what we're here for

 

It was forum regular Ericsbrother who came up with the expression the Unicorn Food Tax, quite an accurate way to describe the extra £60 the PPCs add to their claims with no legal justification whatsoever.

 

Yes, were OPS to take you to court you would be the defendant and so the case would be at your local court (or any court you chose).  Again yes, you would have to attend (although at the moment hearings are remote due to COVID).

 

I'll have a look at other OPS threads, but also have a search on this forum for "broken machine" and the same on the Parking Prankster's blog, there must be something.

[FTMDave]

Parking Prankster: Minster Baywatch - you've been Gladstoned. Frustration of Contract

PARKING-PRANKSTER.BLOGSPOT.COM

---

01-12-2016 C2GF5R96 Minster Baywatch v Ms W. York The motorist parked in a car park charging £1 for 12 hours. The motorist was perfectly w...

 

 

Edited June 14, 2021 by FTMDave
Extra link added

[brassnecked]

One thing you must do is get the FINE narrative out of your head, they are not fines, they are a Speculative Invoice for breaching the terms in a Contract they allege they have by you parking in a car park they infest.  Now if you made an effort to pay, or it was impossible to pay, as sole method a broken machine, and any mobile app system convoluted and difficult to use, or impossible as no mobile signal, any contract they deemed exists would be frustrated by the inability of you to make the required consideration, as in actually pay.

[ghedgehog]

I continue to refer to it as a "fine" partly as a wind-up, but also because it is a fine in all but name. It's not going to affect my decision as to whether to contest it though. I have almost made up my mind to do so, but I have until 22nd June to pay the reduced amount, so I may chicken out before then

 

I have attached a PDF with the PCNs in - photographed with my phone, so I hope it's legible.

 

Thanks for links to those other threads. I'll have a read through

 

 

 

PCNs.pdf

Edited June 16, 2021 by FTMDave
Thread tidied

[FTMDave]

..